Cheating the Interview

It’s a growing concern: candidates cheating during technical interviews. Stories of candidates using outside help or leveraging AI tools during interviews have become increasingly common. Yet, how widespread is this trend, and more importantly, why does it happen? If a candidate genuinely lacks the skills, they’ll likely be found out quickly after hire—so what’s motivating them to cheat in the first place?

This growing phenomenon presents an opportunity to reevaluate how we assess talent in a world where technology and the nature of work are rapidly evolving.

Defining Cheating: What Really Matters?

The definition of "cheating" is far from static. Decades ago, using a slide rule during an exam might have raised eyebrows. Today, not knowing how to use a calculator for basic calculations would be unthinkable in many fields. Similarly, the tools we use in software engineering—Google, Stack Overflow, Copilot—blur the lines of what constitutes independent work versus leveraging available resources.

Cheating often boils down to one question: is the candidate representing their abilities truthfully? Using tools isn’t inherently dishonest if the role requires those tools in day-to-day work. The real challenge lies in understanding the distinction between dishonesty about foundational skills and effectively using resources to solve problems—a core part of most modern tech jobs.

Why Does Cheating Happen?

If candidates can’t do the job, why cheat when the risk of getting caught is so high? The answer may lie in how we design and communicate our hiring processes:

1. Unrealistic Expectations: Candidates might cheat if they perceive the interview as detached from the actual job requirements. When interviews emphasize esoteric knowledge or skills not directly relevant to the role, candidates may resort to external help to "play the game."
2. Misaligned Incentives: In a competitive job market, candidates often feel immense pressure to stand out. If the perception is that hiring processes reward theatrics over authenticity, some may feel cornered into bending the rules.
3. Tooling Gaps: Candidates today frequently use AI tools like Copilot or GPT to assist in coding. If your interview forbids these tools while the job embraces them, candidates may cheat out of frustration, believing they’re being judged on outdated criteria.

Rethinking Assessments

Hiring managers and talent teams need to assess more than just the immediate skills of a candidate—they need to evaluate their ability to adapt, grow, and succeed in a real-world environment. Here’s how:

1. Reevaluate What You’re Testing: Are you asking candidates to solve problems they’d realistically face on the job? If you’re requiring algorithmic problem-solving for a web developer role, you might be assessing the wrong skills.
2. Embrace the Tools of the Trade: If candidates will use AI tools like Copilot or GPT in their daily work, consider incorporating these into your assessments. Test their ability to provide effective prompts, debug AI-generated code, and refine outputs. These are increasingly critical skills in modern software development.
3. Focus on Practical Outputs: Instead of theoretical questions or whiteboard coding, shift toward portfolio reviews, take-home projects, or pair programming sessions. These give a clearer picture of a candidate’s working style and ability to deliver.

Dealing with Dishonesty

For cases where a candidate misrepresents their skills, it’s essential to have processes in place:

1. 30-60-90 Day Plans: Clearly define expectations for the first three months. Regular check-ins and measurable goals can help identify discrepancies between claimed skills and actual performance early on.
2. Transparent Feedback Loops: Foster a culture where honest feedback is shared constructively. Candidates who find themselves struggling should feel supported in seeking help rather than hiding deficiencies.
3. Quick Response to Mismatches: No one wants to fire a new hire, but if a candidate is clearly not capable of performing the role, it’s better to act decisively than to let the problem fester. Address the situation with fairness and transparency.

Looking Ahead

The line between cheating and effective resource use will continue to blur as technology advances. It’s up to hiring managers and talent teams to evolve their practices, focusing on the skills and attributes that truly matter. By designing assessments that reflect the realities of the role and embracing the tools that define modern work, we can create hiring processes that are both fairer and more effective.

In the end, the goal isn’t to catch candidates out—it’s to find the best fit for the role. By fostering a hiring culture rooted in authenticity and alignment, we can build stronger teams and create better outcomes for everyone involved.